Bookmark and Share

Dishing dirt

In new book, an immunologist explains why an intimate connection to the earth beneath our feet can keep us healthy


[Published 20th March 2009 02:55 PM GMT]


Mary Ruebush, an immunologist at the Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, & Idaho Rural Health Research Center, points to a report of last winter's outbreak of Haemophilus influenzae meningitis in Minneapolis as the perfect illustration of why people should read her new book Why Dirt is Good.


Why Dirt is Good conveys in clear detail how the body works to immunize itself against infection and disease. Without condescension, Ruebush explains how self-immunization begins in utero and continues throughout our lives to protect and defend the human body. She also explains what we're doing to hinder and obstruct our bodies' natural defenses. "Dirt" to Ruebush is anything to which the human body's immune system might take exception, immediately working to defend the body from the invader.

Ruebush starts her tour through immunity in the womb, with mother sharing crucial antibodies with her developing child. The sharing continues through breastfeeding and moves on to childhood and the need for every child's immune system to be exposed to some good, honest dirt. Ruebush takes on society's fixation with antibacterial soaps, our current over-reliance on antibiotics and the effects of these habits on our overall health. Robbed of a close connection to "dirt," more and more of us are falling prey to asthma, allergies and even autoimmune diseases. Bacteria and viruses are thriving, replicating and adapting as never before, giving us newer versions of MRSA (Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus) and other pathogens.

Ruebush also places vaccines in the "dirt" category as she explains how they assist the body in preparing good defenses against diseases that used to kill or cripple. She takes issue with those who are choosing not to vaccinate their children. "I'd like to see us return to common sense," Ruebush told The Scientist. When asked about the measles vaccine/autism debate, Ruebush reacted angrily. "That urban legend arose on the basis of one bit of research that was completely flawed," she said, in reference to Andrew Wakefield's now discredited paper in The Lancet. "The guy observed 12 patients with no controls whatsoever and because some of those patients excreted live viruses [from the measles vaccine] in their stool, the debate has gone on about the vaccine causing autism. We don't know what causes autism." Ruebush's view is supported by the American Association of Pediatrics, which states on its website: "Extensive reports from both the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Institute of Medicine and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention conclude that there is no proven association between Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism."

Dirt's closing salvo details Ruebush's plea for a return to common sense. She advises readers to wait and see what develops before they rush to the drugstore for over the counter medication that will simply suppress their symptoms and not help in any real way. She tells parents what to do with a baby who develops a cold, what to do when you develop a cold, and when, exactly, to call for medical assistance.

Ruebush said writing Why Dirt is Good was a golden opportunity to express the ideas and thoughts she's gathered over years of teaching, research and writing about infectious diseases and immunology. She said she feels that the public is currently misinformed about over the counter and prescription drugs and too often sees them as cure-alls, rather than fallbacks when nature needs some assistance. Her book is well written, thoughtful, and would make a terrific gift for an expectant couple. It would make an equally terrific gift for the germophobe in your life.

Why Dirt is Good: 5 Ways to Make Germs Your Friends, by Mary Ruebush, PhD, Kaplan Publishing, New York, 2009. 170 pp. ISBN: 978-1-427-79804-6. $19.95

Related stories:
  • MRSA: RIP?
    [11th December 2007]
  • Can Journalists Help Improve Peer Review?
    [July 2007]


  • Advertisement

     

    Rate this article

    Rating: 4.58/5 (43 votes )





    More research needed
    by Sally Beck

    [Comment posted 2009-03-26 11:28:30]
    A little information is a dangerous thing. Ruebush should check her facts. The Wakefield research has not been discredited or retracted (see Pub-Med for not retracted).

    The Wakefield scientists were looking at bowel biopsies not stools. They never said that the MMR caused autism, they said eight of the 12 parents whose children took part in the study had reported that their children were developing normally until they received the MMR vaccine, then they reported that they regressed and were later diagnosed as autistic. At a press conference Wakefield said that further investigation was necessary before any link could be made.

    When manufacturers test vaccines they never use a control group. They simply test a new vaccine against a different version of itself. The one with fewest adverse affects wins! They don't test against a control group so they have no idea whether the vaccine is causing harm or not. That's a spectacular bit of information that never appears in the media. But we do know that groups who shun vaccines are far healthier - see the Armish. And did you know that American babies are not that healthy (why, with all the vaccines they get?) They're ranked 41st in the world for good health.



    Vacines- 'Good, Honest Dirt?
    by Colleen Wharton-Hood

    [Comment posted 2009-03-25 16:13:29]
    Vaccines- Good honest dirt?

    Hardly- and this view seems quite at odds with Mary Ruebush?s commendable plea for a review of the excessive hygienic practices of today and a return to ?Good, Honest Dirt?.

    Apart from the questionable in vitro mix, the adjuvants contained within vaccines to enable more profitable bulk sales hold as great a threat. Perhaps greater.

    Should an infant?s immature immune system have to defend itself against ?formaldehyde disease? for instance, or any of the other ?adjuvant diseases? mentioned below.?

    Can one honestly place under the banner of ?good, honest dirt? the following adjuvant horrors? Mercury, aluminium, formaldehyde, animal tissues, aborted foetal cells, mineral oils, antibiotics and ?unidentified particles? LINK

    As one example, here is a link on Aluminium. It will give you a description of what it can cause on its own, let alone injected in combination with the other adjuvants. LINK

    On the heels of the Hannah Poling vaccine case comes another. Mysterious Vaccine Court created in 1986 by the pharmaceutical industry, with the support of Congress, rules in favor of Bailey Banks against HHS. "Banks vs. HHS is the second known case where the Vaccine Court could not deny the overwhelming evidence showing vaccines caused a child's autism. The first was the case of Hannah Poling in March of 2008, where the court found in her favor and awarded her family compensation. LINK

    Is it really common sense to ?expose every child's immune system to be exposed to this kind of dirt??



    Ahh
    by Donald Duck

    [Comment posted 2009-03-23 20:46:42]
    I agree with the author on everything but vaccinations. A properly done vaccination at the proper age (at least over ten years) is good, but since some elements in a vaccine are heavier, and settle with time, doctors who fail to shake up vaccinations will give four patients a mere placebo shot and one patient a serious overdose of heavy compounds in addition to the vaccine itself. Anyway, long story short, I've met a kid whose autism, if not caused, was triggered by poorly administered vaccinations as a child.

    On the other hand, a full-heartedly agree that antibiotics are overused. A friend of my cousin recently died of a drug resistant infection within two weeks of first symptoms. She ran out of her own prescriptions so she borrowed her friend's, was in a dozen or so extracurricular activities AND went to public school, never stayed home because she was sick, didn't sleep, and, in short, was an American poster child. Was, anyway.

    I also agree that exposure is the best way to build the immune system. I got whooping cough the natural way, got rid of it the natural way with the aid of homeopathic drugs, and by golly I am not going to ever catch it again. Can't say that about over half of the vaccines administered nowadays.




    healthy dirt
    by Gary Huber

    [Comment posted 2009-03-23 13:17:07]
    A wise old dairy farmer that I knew back in the Midwest always said that you need to eat a pound of dirt throughout your life to stay healthy.




    I am not qualified on the vaccine debate but--
    by Michael Staihr

    [Comment posted 2009-03-23 13:10:30]
    I have had an instinctual aversion to the obsession of "cleanliness" that has resulted from the constant bombardment for sanitizing cleaners and the overuse of artificial antibiotics. Maybe it was my early exposure to The War of the Worlds in my youth..lol. Exposure to the soil has never been an issue with me and any health problems I have had have been from "unnatural" causes which brings me to my point. The responder at 18:37:52 mentions chemical contamination which would not be considered contact with natural soil and the next responder touts removal of meat from the diet without mentioning that the current meat industry is in no way natural, ie. growth hormones, antibiotics etc. but neglects mentioning that our vegetables are also contaminated with complex unnatural chemicals. Arguments such as these are not relevant to the thesis that natural soil could be a good thing. The point here is one of balance. One should not immerse themselves in rotting garbage but also should not seal themselves in a plastic sanitized bubble.



    Latest proven association - RotaTeq
    by Anita Allen

    [Comment posted 2009-03-22 15:37:29]
    LINK

    Medical News: Vaccines

    AAAAI: Rotavirus Vaccine May Cause Infections in SCID Kids
    Download Complimentary Source PDF

    By John Gever, Senior Editor, MedPage Today
    Published: March 18, 2009
    Reviewed by Dori F. Zaleznik, MD; Associate Clinical Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston. Earn CME/CE credit
    for reading medical news


    WASHINGTON, March 17 -- The rotavirus vaccine recommended for all infants can cause infection in babies with severe immunodeficiencies, a researcher said here.



    Wakefield update
    by Anita Allen

    [Comment posted 2009-03-22 14:35:11]
    At least stay uptodate if you wish to pass judgement on Dr Andrew Wakefield. I suggest you browse National Vaccine Information Centre website.

    Something from March 20:

    * ►March 20, 2009 - NVIC Vaccine E-Newsletter
    Vaccine Bullies & Fighting Back by Barbara Loe Fisher

    What is remarkable about this piece of writing is that it is a one-stop guide to the latest information on the Wakefield saga. Links throughout the piece take one to the real story.

    I have no idea how the The Scientist reporter arrives at her opinion that Wakefield's research is "discredited". Maybe everyone in the newsroom agrees with her. All I'm saying is that you can only hold this opinion if you are not following the saga itself day by day by writers who are scrupulous about getting facts straight.

    And the fact that an immunologist doesn't know about proven associations between vaccines, nor the extent, means only one thing - they aren't uptodate in immunology.

    If I can stay uptodate on the tip of darkest Africa, anyone can. Anita Allen, Ekurhuleni, South Africa.



    The Wakefield Controversy
    by Nancy Noben-Trauth

    [Comment posted 2009-03-22 14:09:06]
    The real outrage concerning vaccines shouldn't be if they are safe (they are), but over the flawed research that was published by Andrew Wakefield in 1998.

    In 2004, it was revealed that Wakefield received more than $89,000 from a lawyer to examine 10 children with autism, in order to find a link with measles! Wakefield lost his license to practice medicine in England and is now in Texas.

    The book "Autism's False Prophets" by Paul Offit, relates stories of how easily we can be persuaded to endanger the health of our children.



    Author needs to come clean
    by Anita Allen

    [Comment posted 2009-03-21 03:34:16]
    Anyone who read the Hannah Poling case knows there's an association between vaccines and serious side effects, even death. Her father, a PhD has spelled it out scientifically.

    Anyone who follows the continuing Wakefield saga knows that as each day passes since his 1998 paper, the evidence mounts of an unacceptable risk. The latest Japanese study quoted by Clifford Miller, an attorney in the UK who takes vaccine-related litigation pro bono, is incontrovertible. A "proven association" in the misspeak of bureacracy.

    Why do you think there's a Vaccine Compensation Act in place in US since 1986 if there isn't proven associations?

    Why do you think the CDC would have on it's website admissions that 90 million Americans were exposed to SV40 via contaminated vaccines if it wasn't a proven association?

    Why do so many children get the diseases they are supposedly vaccinated against?

    Why are we never told which cases are vaccine-related and which are wild type infections?

    Why are there no studies comparing non-vaccinated patients and vaccinated ones over the life-time?

    A massive clean-out is needed before anyone adds another vaccine to the 63 separate immunisations children get in the US. In South Africa we have a meningitis outbreak in the same months the first meningitis vaccine is available and due to be rolled out April 1 in the public health system.

    The de facto mandatory immunisation is a violation of the constitutional right to make an informed choice - just as the US Court ruled last week in allowing 200 Nigerian families to sue a vaccine manufacturer after their relatives died in a meningitis vaccine trial. - Anita Allen, Ekurhuleni, South Africa.



    Not all dirt is healthy
    by anonymous poster

    [Comment posted 2009-03-20 18:37:52]
    Unfortunately I grew up going barefoot in an area in Southern New Jersey near the DuPont chemical plant. It polluted the entire area including the Delaware River. And what about all the chemicals we still put on our farmlands and lawns?



    Now let's go further into eating close to the ground
    by TONY SOMERA

    [Comment posted 2009-03-20 13:11:30]
    Having just coped with cancer, I'm starting to listen with added interest to anyone who argues in favor of getting near the earth, including eating vegan. So let's see more articles along those lines. As I've come to believe, the cancer industry is not really interested in curing cancer, it's more interested in making money by treating it. Cut out animal products (eat close to the earth) and you'll start making progress preventing cancer. The idea is your immune system will do the job.



    down on the farm
    by anonymous poster

    [Comment posted 2009-03-20 12:31:56]
    My family has long thought we have been healthier because of the dirt and germs we have been exposed to growing up on the farm.



    The News


    Front Cover

    Register for FREE Online Access

    • »Current issue
    • »Best Places to Work and Salary surveys
    • »Daily news and monthly contents emails

    Register »

    Subscribe to the Magazine

    • »Monthly print issues
    • »Unlimited online access
    • »Special offers on books, apparel, and more

    Subscribe »

    Library Subscriptions
    Recommend to a Librarian

    Masthead | Contact | Advertise | Privacy Policy
    © 1986-2012 The Scientist